• pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Basically, it didn’t get a hearing to get out of committee. Another fucked up headline politico. You’re consistently proving your worth.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Basically, it didn’t get a hearing to get out of committee.

      And how does that not confirm the point of the article? No, seriously, I have no idea how the whole committee system works; who would’ve been responsible for getting it to a proper vote?

      • frunch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I’m also interested in getting a better understanding of how this works. I’m hopeful the comments OP comes back to explain. I genuinely would like to know exactly where this fell apart, because it doesn’t seem like that outrageous of an idea.

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Do you think for one second that this would have been even reported on if it was the other side? The headline should have read that it didn’t get out of committee and made boring, just like all of the crazy shit they sane wash for trump.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Uh… that has nothing to do with what I asked? Is there context that challenges the framing of the article? Because the article treats the bill not getting out of committee as adding insult to injury rather than a boring event.